Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38102495›Full record

ArticleTAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik2023

Using visual scores for genomic prediction of complex traits in breeding programs.

Camila Ferreira Azevedo, Luis Felipe Ventorim Ferrão, Juliana Benevenuto, Marcos Deon Vilela de Resende, Moyses Nascimento, Ana Carolina Campana Nascimento, Patricio R Munoz

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Transferability of genomic prediction models across market segments in potato and the effect of selection.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Camila Ferreira AzevedoStatistics Department, Federal University of Viçosa, Viçosa, Minas Gerais, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0438-5123
Luis Felipe Ventorim FerrãoHorticultural Sciences Department, Blueberry Breeding and Genomics Lab, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9655-4838
Juliana BenevenutoHorticultural Sciences Department, Blueberry Breeding and Genomics Lab, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4698-2738
Marcos Deon Vilela de ResendeStatistics Department, Federal University of Viçosa, Viçosa, Minas Gerais, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3087-3588
Moyses NascimentoStatistics Department, Federal University of Viçosa, Viçosa, Minas Gerais, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5886-9540
Ana Carolina Campana NascimentoStatistics Department, Federal University of Viçosa, Viçosa, Minas Gerais, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6985-1490
Patricio R MunozHorticultural Sciences Department, Blueberry Breeding and Genomics Lab, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA. p.munoz@ufl.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8973-9351

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

key messageAn approach for handling visual scores with potential errors and subjectivity in scores was evaluated in simulated and blueberry recurrent selection breeding schemes to assist breeders in their decision-making. Most genomic prediction methods are based on assumptions of normality due to their simplicity and ease of implementation. However, in plant and animal breeding, continuous traits are often visually scored as categorical traits and analyzed as a Gaussian variable, thus violating the normality assumption, which could affect the prediction of breeding values and the estimation of genetic parameters. In this study, we examined the main challenges of visual scores for genomic prediction and genetic parameter estimation using mixed models, Bayesian, and machine learning methods. We evaluated these approaches using simulated and real breeding data sets. Our contribution in this study is a five-fold demonstration: (i) collecting data using an intermediate number of categories (1-3 and 1-5) is the best strategy, even considering errors associated with visual scores; (ii) Linear Mixed Models and Bayesian Linear Regression are robust to the normality violation, but marginal gains can be achieved when using Bayesian Ordinal Regression Models (BORM) and Random Forest Classification; (iii) genetic parameters are better estimated using BORM; (iv) our conclusions using simulated data are also applicable to real data in autotetraploid blueberry; and (v) a comparison of continuous and categorical phenotypes found that investing in the evaluation of 600-1000 categorical data points with low error, when it is not feasible to collect continuous phenotypes, is a strategy for improving predictive abilities. Our findings suggest the best approaches for effectively using visual scores traits to explore genetic information in breeding programs and highlight the importance of investing in the training of evaluator teams and in high-quality phenotyping.

Indexed as

Multifactorial InheritancePlant BreedingAnimalsBayes TheoremGenomeGenomicsModels, GeneticPhenotype

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.